2024年1月22日 星期一

維護香港獨特性 不同意見多包容

<轉載自2024123 明報 社評>

藝術發展局終止對「香港舞台劇獎頒獎禮」資助,在文藝界引發激烈迴響。當局的公開解釋,提到上屆頒獎禮邀請漫畫家尊子及記者蔡玉玲任頒獎嘉賓,以及主持人以「紅線」為話題,反映決定帶有政治性,當局若認為當日頒獎禮真的有不妥當之處,可以公開反駁、議事論事,而不是在事發半年後,突然以停止資助的手法「懲罰」主辦方,兼且不給予申辯機會。多元開放是香港獨特性所在,只要不是違法或弄虛作假,當局應該多以包容態度,體待不同意見,不應該將有稜角的觀點,與「軟對抗」混為一談,若連「紅線問題」也成為不能談的紅線,對於維護香港獨特性,並無好處。

劇協頒獎禮惹風波 停資助懲罰理據弱

香港戲劇協會(下稱劇協)主辦的「香港舞台劇獎頒獎禮」,過去24年一直獲得藝發局資助,然而劇協上周表示,上月接到局方通知,指上屆(第31屆)頒獎禮內容,對藝發局聲譽「造成損害或不利影響」,扣減未付的最後一期撥款,局方同時又以「競爭劇烈及資源有限」為理由,停止資助今屆頒獎禮。

藝發局公開回應事件,最初僅提到頒獎禮「作出不尋常安排」,「收到不少意見」質疑內容及安排不妥,惟沒有進一步說明,其後才發稿交代「不妥內容」,包括「有別以往」邀請戲劇界前輩、知名藝術家、政府代表、藝發局代表等作為頒獎嘉賓的做法,選擇邀請「當時充滿新聞話題的時事漫畫家」尊子,以及記者蔡玉玲女士擔任頒獎嘉賓;局方又提到,當日頒獎禮主持人以「紅橋」、「紅線」為話題,「意有所指、語帶雙關」,「如果以此手法引起公眾及媒體注意及製造社會話題」,局方不能苟同,決定扣減資助,以示「不能接受」。考慮到文體旅局長公開支持藝發局決定,康文署亦決定不提供今屆場地,外界認為政府在今次事件中有角色,亦屬情理之中。

當局的說法,反映終止資助一事,明顯與政治有關,若不是有人從國安角度投訴頒獎禮,相信藝發局主席霍啟剛日前亦不用提到,需要「盡量降低違反國安法風險」。若有人在公開場合公然違反國安法,當然要依法追究,問題是當日頒獎禮上,是否真的有「涉嫌違反」國安法的內容安排?觀乎已知材料,實在看不出有違法情况。

藝發局質疑頒獎嘉賓安排「有別以往」,劇協會長馮祿德已澄清,以往他們亦曾邀請時裝、體育及新聞界人士任頒獎嘉賓。廣義來說,紀錄片製作人和漫畫家,也跟文化藝術相關,不見得為何不能當頒獎嘉賓。蔡玉玲和尊子是新聞人物,但頒獎禮舉行時,兩人皆屬無罪之身,蔡玉玲剛獲終院裁定查冊案上訴得直;至於尊子的漫畫,雖然一再惹來高官抨擊,但他從未因此被控違反國安或煽動等罪。倘若只因有人視他倆為「逆鱗」,反對他們上台頒獎,當局事後就要「懲罰」劇協,包容度未免太低。

無可否認,上屆香港舞台劇獎頒獎禮,由以「勇氣」為主題、邀請蔡玉玲尊子作頒獎嘉賓,以至主持人以「紅橋」和「紅線」為話題,的確惹來很多政治聯想,但表達對「紅線」的憂慮和關注,本身並不是什麼彌天大罪。現在當局決定扣減撥款、終止資助及拒借場地,怎麼看都是一種懲罰,形同政治施壓,最好連紅線問題也不要談。

意見觀點有稜角 並不等於軟對抗

誠然,頒獎禮不應該過度政治化。1975年荷李活奧斯卡頒獎禮,反戰影片《心靈與智慧》獲頒最佳紀錄片獎,監製台上讀出越共官員致謝信息,即場爭議不絕,奧斯卡主持隨後要急急代表主辦單位讀出聲明,劃清界線;1993年荷李活奧斯卡頒獎禮,影星李察基爾上台頒獎卻無視大會講稿,大談西藏獨立,結果主辦單位禁止他再當頒獎嘉賓20年。第31屆香港舞台劇獎頒獎禮去年中舉行,倘若當局認為主辦單位真有失當之處,大可發表聲明,就事論事,公開批評,而不是因為有人投訴,多月後突然秋後算帳,過程未予劇協正式申辯機會,中斷資助又說不出具體標準,僅以一句「競爭劇烈及資源有限」帶過。當局指頒獎禮內容對藝發局聲譽「造成損害或不利影響」,然而當局處理今次事件手法粗暴,所造成的「觀感損害」其實可能更大。

港英時代的香港,政治審查長期嚴苛,紅線處處可見。1950年代內地電影《女籃5號》因出現五星旗及中國國歌,遭港英禁播;1980年代初電影《皇天后土》則因為涉及文革內容,港英當局以「破壞本港與其他地區友好關係」為由禁播。港大學者吳海傑便指出,過去百多年本港的言論表達自由空間,其實很受全球政治大勢影響。無論如何,由上世紀末到本世紀初的30年間,香港所享有的言論及表達自由,確實處於史無前例的高度,成為了香港重要標記。國際新形勢下,香港必須維護國家安全,同時也要維護社會自由開放的獨特性。

近年一系列事件,由圖書館下架風波,到中環食肆外黃帽工人塗鴉被抹等,令人覺得當局有太多忌諱和紅線,收到投訴未搞清楚就從嚴處理。特區當局這兩年常談「軟對抗」問題,有關現象確實存在,但不等於一些有稜角的觀點,又或一些當局不中聽的意見,統統都是軟對抗。當局對於這類觀點和意見,應該多持包容態度,若下下都重手整治,反應過度,將影響社會自由開放氛圍。公權力運用必須時刻保持審慎。今次劇協頒獎禮風波,當局處理是否合理合度,有必要斟酌。

Preserving Hong Kong's Uniqueness

The Hong Kong Arts Development Council (HKADC) has terminated its funding for the Hong Kong Drama Awards (hereafter the Awards), triggering a fierce backlash from the literary and art circles. In the Council's public explanation, it mentions the invitation of cartoonist Zunzi and journalist Bao Choy as award presenters at the last awards ceremony and the hosts' conversations on ''red lines'', showing that the decision was somehow political.

The Awards, organised by the Hong Kong Federation of Drama Societies (hereafter the Federation), have received funding from the HKADC over the past 24 years. However, the Federation stated last week that it had received a notice from the HKADC last month, saying that the contents of the previous (31st) award ceremony had ''caused damage or adverse impact'' to the reputation of the HKADC, so the unpaid final instalment of the funding had been pulled. The HKADC had also stopped funding this year's awards ceremony on the grounds of ''intense competition and limited resources''.

Responding to the incident, the HKADC at first merely said that the ceremony had made ''extraordinary arrangement'' and it had ''received comments'' questioning the appropriateness of contents and arrangement, but it did not provide further elaboration. Later it released a statement explaining what it had meant by ''inappropriate content'', which included deviation from past practices in which theatre veterans, renowned artists, representatives from the government and HKADC were invited as award presenters. Instead, the Federation chose to invite ''then-controversial cartoonist'' Zunzi and journalist Bao Choy as award presenters.

The HKADC also claimed that the hosts of the award ceremony conversed on ''red bridge'' and ''red line'', ''making remarks with subtext''. It could not beg to differ with ''the notion of raising public and media attention as well as social topics through this approach'', and this necessitated the decision in funding adjustment to indicate ''unacceptance''. As the Secretary for Culture, Sports and Tourism has publicly supported the HKADC's decision, the Leisure and Cultural Services Department has also decided not to provide a venue for the Awards' event this year. It is reasonable for outsiders to believe that the government has played a role in this incident.

The Council's statements show that the termination of funding for the Awards is clearly politically related. Had the complaint against the Awards not been made from the perspective of national security, Kenneth Fok, the chairman of the HKADC, would not have mentioned the need to ''minimise the risk of violating the National Security Law''.

No doubt if someone blatantly violates the National Security Law on a public occasion, this will need to be investigated in accordance with the law. The question is whether any content or arrangement at the award ceremony that day could indeed have violated the National Security Law. Judging from the information at hand, there is no evidence the law has been violated.

The SAR authorities have often talked about the problem of ''soft confrontation'' over the past two years. While this phenomenon does exist, it does not mean that some nonconformist views or opinions that the authorities do not like are all soft confrontations. The authorities should be more tolerant of such views and opinions. If they overreact by cracking down on such views on every occasion, the atmosphere of a free and open society will be affected. Public power must always be used with prudence. It is necessary to consider whether the authorities' handling of the incident concerning the Federation is reasonable and appropriate.

維護香港獨特性 不同意見多包容

藝術發展局終止對「香港舞台劇獎頒獎禮」資助,在文藝界引發激烈迴響。當局的公開解釋,提到上屆頒獎禮邀請漫畫家尊子及記者蔡玉玲任頒獎嘉賓,以及主持人以「紅線」為話題,反映決定帶有政治性。

香港戲劇協會(下稱劇協)主辦的「香港舞台劇獎頒獎禮」,過去24年一直獲得藝發局資助,然而劇協上周表示,上月接到局方通知,指上屆(第31屆)頒獎禮內容,對藝發局聲譽「造成損害或不利影響」,扣減未付的最後一期撥款,局方同時又以「競爭劇烈及資源有限」為理由,停止資助今屆頒獎禮。

藝發局公開回應事件,最初僅提到頒獎禮「作出不尋常安排」,「收到不少意見」質疑內容及安排不妥,惟沒有進一步說明,其後才發稿交代「不妥內容」,包括「有別以往」邀請戲劇界前輩、知名藝術家、政府代表、藝發局代表等作為頒獎嘉賓的做法,選擇邀請「當時充滿新聞話題的時事漫畫家」尊子,以及記者蔡玉玲女士擔任頒獎嘉賓。

局方又提到,當日頒獎禮主持人以「紅橋」、「紅線」為話題,「意有所指、語帶雙關」,「如果以此手法引起公眾及媒體注意及製造社會話題」,局方不能苟同,決定扣減資助,以示「不能接受」。考慮到文體旅局長公開支持藝發局決定,康文署亦決定不提供今屆場地,外界認為政府在今次事件中有角色,亦屬情理之中。

當局的說法,反映終止資助一事,明顯與政治有關,若不是有人從國安角度投訴頒獎禮,相信藝發局主席霍啟剛日前亦不用提到,需要「盡量降低違反國安法風險」。

若有人在公開場合公然違反國安法,當然要依法追究,問題是當日頒獎禮上,是否真的有「涉嫌違反」國安法的內容安排?觀乎已知材料,實在看不出有違法情况。

特區當局這兩年常談「軟對抗」問題,有關現象確實存在,但不等於一些有稜角的觀點,又或一些當局不中聽的意見,統統都是軟對抗。當局對於這類觀點和意見,應該多持包容態度,若下下都重手整治,反應過度,將影響社會自由開放氛圍。公權力運用必須時刻保持審慎。今次劇協頒獎禮風波,當局處理是否合理合度,有必要斟酌。

沒有留言:

張貼留言